MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3135757936 · doi:10.3917/ta.010.0126

Peut-on agir en formation sur les représentations du travail ?

2012· article· fr· W3135757936 on OpenAlex
Otilia Holgado

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTravail et Apprentissages · 2012
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, sociology, and vocational training
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceSociologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Après la prise de poste, de nombreux enseignants de la formation professionnelle n’ont pas la possibilité de se tenir informés des évolutions du domaine professionnel pour lequel ils préparent les élèves. Ils peuvent en revanche bénéficier de séances de formation continue sur des thèmes techniques. Cet article discute la possibilité de faire de la formation continue de ces enseignants un lieu de rencontre indirecte avec le monde professionnel qui les concerne. Réunies dans certaines séances de formation continue, deux conditions semblent permettre aux enseignants d’actualiser et d’enrichir leurs représentations du monde du travail : la mixité des deux publics, enseignant et professionnel, ainsi que la mise à disposition pendant la formation d’un temps permettant à chaque participant d’évoquer son travail et ses préoccupations professionnelles. Les données empiriques mobilisées sont issues d’une séquence couramment observée en début des séances de formation continue, le tour de table.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.389
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.185
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.264 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it